AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.—C.R. Asha Viji Rani, the Petitioner herein, working as a Private Secretary in Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, who was apprehended on 21.9.1997 at about 8.00 p.m. on her arrival from Singapore at Anna International Airport, Chennai, by the Respondent in connection with the case registered for the offence u/s 135(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, is making a second attempt to get bail from this Court.
The facts are these:- The Petitioner, a married woman aged about 33 years, joined the ministerial service in the Judicial Department and on promotion is working as Private Secretary to the learned Judge in Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in Chennai.
The Petitioner went to Singapore and returned to Chennai and arrived at Anna International Airport at 8.00 p.m. on 21.9.1997. When she came towards the Green Channel, her packages, one hand luggage, namely, Wilson Zipper bag and four checked-in luggages, namely, one ''Eminent'' light brown colour leather zipper bag, one ''Corolite'' multi colour zipper bag and one ''Sony TV'' cardboard carton were examined.
The above packages contained electronic items like 7 Nos. Video cameras, 5 Nos. Casio Printing Calculators, 2 Nos. Printing Calculators, 2 Nos. Cordless Telephones and 10 Nos. Video Cassettes totally valued at Rs. 4,10,800/- Since there was no declaration of these goods, the same were seized under a Mahazar for action under the Customs Act, 1962.
Thereafter, when she was questioned as to whether she was carrying any gold on her person, she replied in the negative. Since she was found to be nervous, personal search was carried out. In the said search, the officials were able to find 6 gold biscuits of 10 tolas each with the foreign marking totally weighing 699 grams worth about Rs. 3,10,200, which were concealed in the panties worn by her.
Since she was not in possession of any valid permit for carrying any gold and she had not declared the same to the Customs, the same were seized under a Mahazar. Thus, in all, electronic items and gold, which were totally valued at Rs. 7,21,000/- were seized.
Thereafter, the petitioner had given a voluntary statement before the Respondent, wherein she admitted having concealed the gold in her panties, in order to smuggle the same and brought the other electronic items without declaring the same to the Customs. In her statement she further stated that these goods in question were given to her by her sister in Singapore.
After she was arrested, she was produced before the learned Magistrate, who in turn, remanded her.
The Petitioner filed a bail application before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (E.O.II) and the same was dismissed on 26.9.1997 Thereafter, she moved an application for bail before this Court in Crl.O.P. No. 13956 of 1997 and the same also was dismissed on 18.10.1997 Thus, the present application is a second application filed before this Court on 24.10.1997.
Mr. B. Kumar, the counsel for the Petitioner would bring forth as a change of circumstance that the Petitioner has to attend her brother''s betrothal, which is to take place in the first week of November 1997 and that her mother is a heart-patient and she is longing to see the Petitioner at her critical stage. The learned Counsel would further state that the investigation is almost over and as such, there cannot be any impediment to grant the relief of bail sought for by the Petitioner.
Per contra, the learned Special Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent, would vehemently contend that the circumstances shown in the second application cannot at all be considered as a change of circumstance, as this Court considered the earlier bail application in detail on merits and dismissed the same holding that she is not entitled to bail having regard to the manner in which the gold was smuggled by concealing 6 gold biscuits in her panties.
The learned Special Public Prosecutor would also cite various authorities such as 1987 SCC (Cri.) 365 (State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal J. Porwat) Balkrishna Chhaganlal Soni Vs. State of West Bengal, and State of Maharashtra Vs. Champalal Punjaji Shah, in order to establish that the Courts have to take a serious view of the economic offences, as it would affect the economy of the entire nation.
The learned Special Public Prosecutor would further submit that the offence is one which jeopardises the economy of the country and that it is impossible to take a casual or a light view of the offence.
As correctly pointed out by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, two factors cause anguish in the mind of this Court. One is that the petitioner being a woman of 33 years, who joined the Ministerial service in the Judicial Department, having obtained sufficient experience and then promoted as a Private Secretary to the Judge of Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, has now stooped to the level of smuggling goods. Second factor is that she had concealed 6 gold biscuits inside the panties, in order to escape from the clutches of law.
Therefore, for the position she occupies the manner of concealment of gold in her panties, if true does not make herself fit to hold the responsible post as Private Secretary, that too, in the Judicial Department.
Furthermore, in her statement she had admitted that she went to Singapore on several previous occasions and this time only she brought the gold, as it was handed over by her sister in Singapore, in order to meet out the expenses for the marriage of her sister''s daughter.
The further investigation done in this case would reveal that the statement relating to the handing over of the gold to her by her sister in Singapore is not correct, in view of the statement given by her sister to the Customs denying such handing over.
Therefore, a serious view must be taken of these offences, which show a distressingly growing tendency. The argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner comes from a respectable family and she is longing to attend the betrothal of the her brother and to see her ailing mother would not in any way help her.
If members belonging to the high status in life, that too, a Private Secretary working under a Judge in the Administrative Tribunal, should show scant respect for the laws of this country, which are for public good, for protecting our foreign trade or exchange position of currency difficulties, then this would certainly shock the conscience of the Court and so it has to necessarily take a serious view of the matter.
A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. But, in this case, this economic offence has been committed by the Private Secretary to the Judge with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit, regardless of the consequence to the Society to which she belongs.
A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear or criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest.
When these are the views of the Apex Court in regard to the economic offences, the Courts must be more cautious in dealing with the bail application, that too, filed by an employee of the Judicial Department, who has committed the offence in the manner indicated above, which would show that she has thrown her decency and decorum to be maintained by an employee of the Judicial Department to the winds.
If the Court takes a light view by granting bail to the persons like the Petitioner, the public may think that the Court is siding the offenders, merely because they are the workers in the Judicial Department.
Therefore, I see no reason to grant bail to the Petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.